GPerson

6 ms·

1.
by GPerson 3d ago
Not really. There’s no honest sense in which quantum mechanics is interpolated from the text of Euclid’s elements, to demonstrate the point with a very extreme example. Many mathematical breakthroughs of the past seem to have involved the o
2.
by GPerson 3d ago
It’s all about what “new” means. It is possible to prove something in a very tedious way using preexisting techniques. There have many times in history been new ideas which are not just very impressive applications of old techniques. I’m st
3.
by GPerson 3d ago
I’m just going to say this 100 times I guess. Terence Tao has had a very consistent narrative on AI in math for a very long time, at least since 2023. He’s always described it as a surprisingly good tool and has advocated that mathematician
4.
by GPerson 4d ago
You can invent whatever fantasy you like. I hope more honest people will read the letter (from the fields medalists and other endorsers) and consider it on its merits.
5.
by GPerson 4d ago
> But solving problems is only a tool and proxy for achieving the primary goal of conceptual understanding and insight. Forgetting this in the world of AI may turn the tool against the primary goal.
6.
by GPerson 4d ago
Mathematicians are not idiots! They’ve been living on the same planet as you for the last few years and everyone in any thinking profession has been debating and coming to terms with reality over the same period. People who aren’t involved
7.
by GPerson 5d ago
It’s frustrating that this comment is at the top because it, along with lots of the replies it inspired, absolutely misrepresents the actual declaration. The declaration is not making any statements about not using any AI in mathematics. Th
8.
by GPerson 5d ago
He’s not shell-shocked. He’s had an extremely consistent narrative for years now. You are experiencing a bias where you project your own views onto others, probably because you are not very informed on this.
9.
by GPerson 5d ago
What’s optimistic or non-optimistic specifically about the machine having a system of mathematics beyond our comprehension within it? Why should we care about that in itself?
10.
by GPerson 6d ago
Does the same effect happen in a society which rewrites all of its knowledge over and over using AI?
11.
by GPerson 6d ago
I don’t think this will happen, but it’s possible for humans to adjust our philosophy of mathematical work so that we deprioritize “egotistical” (this is a bad word for what I’m going for, but I mean the desire and economic necessity to ass
12.
by GPerson 6d ago
You are a coward.
13.
by GPerson 6d ago
They’re not necessarily claiming the solutions were imminent. The big questions here from a mathematician’s perspective are to what extent these LLM systems are discovering conceptually new ideas compared to merely combining and pursuing kn
14.
by GPerson 6d ago
It doesn’t matter what you wish if you are actively working towards causing others to fall into poverty on the idea that you and your family must become absurdly wealthy to survive.
15.
by GPerson 6d ago
These all read like excuses for being a moral coward.
16.
by GPerson 6d ago
1) This is not really a strong charge since it hasn’t been done anyway and I don’t think you really expect me to prove a negative. 2) I see no problem here. 3) What is the strongest argument? I’ll double check our thread but I have yet to f
17.
by GPerson 6d ago
I have given my reasons. I will try again. You are fundamentally assuming all real concepts are reducible to arbitrary substrates like language. I believe there are real concepts which are not, like qualia. The entire premise of your belief
18.
by GPerson 6d ago
I recognize you are probably just trying to win an argument, but what actually matters is that the ecosystem of human mathematics has produced strong results and can continue or not continue to do so depending on how we adapt to this new te
19.
by GPerson 6d ago
This is not correct. The stated age of the universe is measured relative to the rest frame of the CMB, the standard preferred frame in cosmology. People working at AI labs like yourself should figure out how to stop destroying science so th
20.
by GPerson 6d ago
Also I want to mention that the letter is not about AI skepticism, in any direct way at least.
21.
by GPerson 6d ago
I am not the relevant one with a position on this. I am referring to people who believe this but work at these companies (especially in capability research). I’m reacting to this > I also feel a need to amass retirement levels of wealth
22.
by GPerson 6d ago
The website previously said, “What is the role of a mathematician when AI can solve conjectures faster?” but they have removed it, possibly as a result of the letter since it happened after.
23.
by GPerson 6d ago
I feel people who sell their souls to be in finance or work as corporate attorneys for bad companies deserve criticism, but people who sell their souls to work for an enterprise they themselves believe is at the very least going to destroy
24.
by GPerson 6d ago
There is a very active open letter of over 1000 signatures from mathematicians in protest of this event. This event is targeting undergraduates. It previously suggested that math researchers already have no place in mathematics, and present
25.
by GPerson 7d ago
> You already conceded that.. May apologies, but I intended to convey the opposite when I said this. I’ll read the rest of this comment later. > My position is that there must be something wrong with the idea that a behaviorally ident
26.
by GPerson 7d ago
There were active labor movements and Social Security was a more moderate proposal than others; this was in the wake of the Great Depression after all. Labor movements played a role in it being considered.
27.
by GPerson 7d ago
> Remember, in this situation we are not describing an LLM, but a system generated from the rules of chemistry However, it is a system with a representation purported to be a correct description of all the relevant rules of chemistry and
28.
by GPerson 7d ago
I’ll just leave this comment to start a thread to ask you about your position and then figure out how I’d like to address your question later. Your position seems to have non-trivial difficulties if its own. I take it you don’t believe that
29.
by GPerson 7d ago
I thought about how to respond to this for quite a while tonight (last night now as I fell asleep). My position is that there must be something wrong with the idea that a behaviorally identical simulation can be made which is not conscious.
30.
by GPerson 8d ago
I agree for most of the people in the story except Buckmaster himself seems to have been supplying real ideas.

More ›